posting two replies that I have recieved from MOE those replies give no doubt to the reasons that this topic became so heated with seemingly polar oposits on interpretation.
an also brings to question that also became another heated debate a couple of years ago and to me reinforces the need to simplyfy the regs. As follows:
Thank you for your email dated February 21, 2012, regarding the definition and retention of hatchery fish. Your enquiry has been forwarded to me for response.
The definitions of various species of hatchery fish are provided below:
“trout” means brook trout, brown trout, cutthroat trout, Dolly Varden, lake trout, rainbow trout or steelhead.
“hatchery trout” means a trout of any kind that has a healed scar in place of the adipose fin.
“hatchery chinook salmon” means a chinook salmon that has a healed scar in place of the adipose, pelvic or pectoral fin, or in place of a maxillary.
“hatchery coho salmon” means a coho salmon that has a healed scar in place of the adipose, pelvic or pectoral fin, or in place of a maxillary.
There is no reference to “mis-clipped” fish in the regulations, as such it is likely up to the discretion of a Conservation or Fisheries Officer, and possibly the opinion of a judge to determine whether or not a specific mis-clipped fish was legal to retain or not.
My interpretation of this regulation is that the adipose fin must be completely removed and replaced with a healed scar. My rational for this is that the regulation does not state that a healed scar must be in place of “the adipose fin or a portion of the adipose fin”.
Stephen MacIver|Policy & Regulations Analyst|Fish, Wildlife and Habitat Management Branch|Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations|Phone (250) 387-9767|Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2012 11:47 PM
To: Conservation Officer Service ENV:EX
Subject: miss clipped steelhead
I noted a rather lengthy discussing on on of the web sites ( Fishing With Rod) regarding the legality of keeping a “mis-clipped fish.
Pictures are accompanying the story.http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=29419.0
my feeling is that unless there is a completely missing adipose fin and a healed scar it is not a keeper, yet several anglers tell us that they are keeping them as the mis-clipped. Some are claiming CO officers have told them it was OK and in one case the CO was present as the fish came to hand (a miss-clip) and told the angler it was OK to kill it.
Please clarify this situation so as we may get back to our full contact angling on the Chilliwack\Vedder.
George (Sandy) Vernon
and the other reply:
The intent of the clip fin is to allow the retention of hatchery fish. Sometimes at the hatchery the fin is not completely removed or is cut long . The fish, if it has the presence of a healed over scar is a hatchery fish and can be harvested.
Conservation Officer Paul McFadden/
Fraser Valley Zone/Conservation Officer Service/
Ministry of Environment/Box 3010, Cultus Lake, B.C.V2R 5H6/
Phone: 1-800-731-6373/Fax: 604-824-2319
So there you have it , A definitive answer
have at it!